Meaning and experiences of participation: a phenomenological study with persons with deafblindness in India

References

• Hemmingsson H, Jonsson H. An occupational perspective on the concept of participation in the International Classification of Functioning, Disability and Health – some critical remarks. Am J Occup Ther [Internet]. 2005;59:569–576.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• World Health Organization. International Classification of Functioning, Disability and Health: ICF [Internet]. Geneva; 2001. Available from: http://www.who.int/classifications/icf/en/
   Google Scholar
• Mallinson T, Hammel J. Measurement of participation: intersecting person, task, and environment. Arch Phys Med Rehabil. 2010;91:S29–S33.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Mirza MP, Kim Y, Stoffel A, et al. Social participation and disability among children from underserved immigrant and nonimmigrant households. Occup Ther Health Care. 2015;29:411–428.
   Google Scholar
• Perenboom RJM, Chorus AMJ. Measuring participation according to the International Classification of Functioning, Disability and Health (ICF). Disabil Rehabil. 2003;25:577–587.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• United Nations. Convention on the rights of persons with disabilities [Internet]. Treaty Series. Geneva; 2006. Available from: http://www.un.org/disabilities/
   Google Scholar
• Whiteneck G, Bogner JA, Heinemann AW. Advancing the measurement of participation. Arch Phys Med Rehabil. 2011;92:540–541.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Dahl TH. International Classification of Functioning, Disability and Health: an introduction and discussion of its potential impact on rehabilitation services and research. J Rehabil Med. 2002;34:201–204.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Dijkers MP. Issues in the conceptualization and measurement of participation: an overview. Arch Phys Med Rehabil. 2010;91:S5–S16.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Eyssen IC, Steultjens MP, Dekker J, et al. A systematic review of instruments assessing participation: challenges in defining participation. Arch Phys Med Rehabil. 2011;92:983–997.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hammel J, Magasi S, Heinemann A, et al. What does participation mean? An insider perspective from people with disabilities. Disabil Rehabil. 2008;30:1445–1460.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Magasi S, Hammel J, Heinemann A, et al. Participation: a comparative analysis of multiple rehabilitation stakeholders’ perspectives. J Rehabil Med. 2009;41:936–944.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Masala C, Petretto DR. From disablement to enablement: conceptual models of disability in the 20th century. Disabil Rehabil. 2008;30:1233–1244.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Mirza M, Magasi S, Hammel J. Soul searching occupations: critical reflections on occupational therapy’s commitment to social justice, disability rights, and participation. In: Pamela Block, Devva Kasnitz, Akemi Nishida, Nick Pollard, editors. Occupying disability: critical approaches to community, justice, and decolonizing disability [Internet]. Dordrecht: Springer Netherlands; 2016. p.159–74. Available from: http://link.springer.com/10.1007/978-3-319-02904-7.
   Google Scholar
• Cornwall A. Unpacking “participation” models, meanings and practices. Community Dev J. 2008;43:269–283.
   Google Scholar
• Eversole R. Remaking participation: challenges for community development practice. Community Dev J. 2012;47:29–41.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Cardol M, Jong BAD, Ward CD. On autonomy and participation in rehabilitation: a response. Disabil Rehabil. 2002;24:1001–1004.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• King G. Perspectives on measuring participation: going forward. Child Care Health Dev. 2013;39:466–469.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Brown M. Participation: the insider’s perspective. Arch Phys Med Rehabil. 2010;91:S34–S37.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Martin Ginis KA, Evans MB, Mortenson WB, et al. Broadening the conceptualization of participation of persons with physical disabilities: a configurative review and recommendations. Arch Phys Med Rehabil. 2017;98:395–402.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Gray DB, Hollingsworth HH, Stark SL, et al. Participation survey/mobility: psychometric properties of a measure of participation for people with mobility impairments and limitations. Arch Phys Med Rehabil. 2006;87:189–197.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Dammeyer J. Deafblindness: a review of the literature. Scand J Public Health. 2014;42:554–562.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Dammeyer J. Deafblindness and dual sensory loss research: current status and future directions. WJO. 2015;5:37.
   Google Scholar
• Brennan M, Bally SJ. Psychosocial adaptations to dual sensory loss in middle and late adulthood. Trends Amplif. 2007;11:281–300.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Wittich W, Barstow EA, Jarry J, et al. Screening for sensory impairment in older adults: training and practice of occupational therapists in Quebec. Can J Occup Ther. 2015;82:283–293.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Simcock P. One of society’s most vulnerable groups? A systematically conducted literature review exploring the vulnerability of deafblind people. Health Soc Care Commun. 2017;25:813–839.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Perfect E, Jaiswal A, Davies TC. Systematic review: investigating the effectiveness of assistive technology to enable internet access for individuals with deafblindness. Assist Technol. 2018;1–10. doi: 10.1080/10400435.2018.1445136
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Jaiswal A, Aldersey H, Wittich W, et al. Participation experiences of people with deafblindness or dual sensory loss: a scoping review of global deafblind literature. PLoS One. 2018;13(9):e0203772.
   Google Scholar
• World Federation of the Deafblind. At risk of exclusion from CRPD and SDGs implementation: inequality and persons with deafblindness. Initial Global Report 2018. [Internet]. 2018. Available from: http://www.internationaldisabilityalliance.org/sites/default/files/wfdb_complete_initial_global_report_september_2018.pdf
   Google Scholar
• Guthrie DM, Declercq A, Finne-Soveri H, et al. The health and well-being of older adults with dual sensory impairment (DSI) in four countries. PLoS One. 2016;11:e0155073.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Guthrie DM, Davidson JGS, Williams N, et al. Combined impairments in vision, hearing and cognition are associated with greater levels of functional and communication difficulties than cognitive impairment alone: analysis of interRAI data for home care and long-term care recipients in Ontario. PLoS One. 2018;13:e0192971.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Wittich W, Jarry J, Groulx G, et al. Rehabilitation and research priorities in deafblindness for the next decade. J Vis Impair Blind. 2016;110(4):219–231.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Swenor BK, Ramulu PY, Willis JR, et al. The prevalence of concurrent hearing and vision impairment in the United States. JAMA Intern Med. 2013;173:312.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Fletcher PC, Guthrie DM. The lived experiences of individuals with acquired deafblindness: challenges and the future. Int J Disabil Commun Rehabil. 2013;12:1.
   Google Scholar
• Hersh M. Deafblind people, communication, independence, and isolation. J Deaf Stud Deaf Educ. 2013;18:446–463.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• LeJeune BJ. Aging with dual sensory loss: thoughts from consumer focus groups. AER J Res Pract Vis Impair Blind. 2010;3:146–152.
   Google Scholar
• Roets-Merken L, Zuidema S, Vernooij-Dassen M, et al. Problems identified by dual sensory impaired older adults in long-term care when using a self-management program: a qualitative study. PLoS One. 2017;12:e0173601.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Schneider JM, Gopinath B, McMahon CM, et al. Dual sensory impairment in older age. J Aging Health. 2011;23:1309–1324.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Möller K, Danermark B. Social recognition, participation, and the dynamic between the environment and personal factors of students with deafblindness. Am Ann Deaf. 2007;152:42–55.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Möller K. Deafblindness: a challenge for assessment–is the ICF a useful tool?. Int J Audiol. 2003;42:140–142.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Jaiswal A, Kumar U, Paul A. Why deafblindness research is necessary in India. DBI Rev. 2018;Jan;47–51.
   Google Scholar
• Paul A, Mathew B, Kumar U, et al. Early intervention (EI) for children with deafblindness in India: barriers and enablers. Disabil Int Dev. 2016;1:4–11.
   Google Scholar
• Grech S. Comment from the field: disability and the majority world: challenging dominant epistemologies. J Lit Cult Disabil Stud. 2011;5:217–219.
   Google Scholar
• Meekosha H. Decolonising disability: thinking and acting globally. Disabil Soc. 2011;26:667–682.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Sense International. Our work [Internet]. 2017 [cited 2017 Jun 7]. Available from: https://www.senseinternational.org.uk/our-work
   Google Scholar
• Government of India. The Rights of Persons with Disabilities Act. 2016;(Dl):1–35. Available from: http://www.tezu.ernet.in/notice/2017/April/RPWD-ACT-2016.pdf
   Google Scholar
• World Health Organization. Towards a common language for functioning, disability and health ICF. International Classification. 2002;1149:1–22. Available from: http://www.who.int/classifications/icf/training/icfbeginnersguide.pdf
   Google Scholar
• C. JW Qualitative inquiry and research design: choosing among five approaches. Los Angeles: SAGE Publications Inc.; 2013.
   Google Scholar
• Whiteneck G, Dijkers MP. Difficult to measure constructs: conceptual and methodological issues concerning participation and environmental factors. Arch Phys Med Rehabil. 2009;90:S22–S35.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Moustakas C. Phenomenological research methods [Internet]. Thousand Oaks (CA): SAGE Publications, Inc.; 1994. Available from: http://methods.sagepub.com/book/phenomenological-research-methods
   Google Scholar
• Liamputtong P. Research methods in health: foundations for evidence-based practice. South Melbourne (Australia): Oxford University Press; 2013.
   Google Scholar
• Patton MQ Qualitative research and evaluation methods. Thousand Oaks (CA): SAGE Publications Inc.; 2002.
   Google Scholar
• Sandelowski M. Sample size in qualitative research. Res Nurs Health. 1995;18:179–183.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• QSR International. NVivo 11 Pro for Windows [Internet]. 2017. Available from: http://www.qsrinternational.com/nvivo/nvivo-products/nvivo-11-for-windows/nvivo-pro
   Google Scholar
• Santos HPO, Black AM, Sandelowski M. Timing of translation in cross-language qualitative research. Qual Health Res. 2015;25:134–144.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Chen HY, Boore JRP. Translation and back-translation in qualitative nursing research: methodological review. J Clin Nurs. 2010;19:234–239.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Krefting L. Rigor in qualitative research: the assessment of trustworthiness. Am J Occup Ther. 1991;45:214–222.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Dalby DM, Hirdes JP, Stolee P, et al. Characteristics of individuals with congenital and acquired deaf-blindness. J Vis Impair Blind. 2009;103:93–102.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Gibson J. Fred outdoors: an initial report into the experiences of outdoor activities for an adult who is congenitally deafblind. J Adventure Educ Outdoor Learn. 2000;1:45–54.
   Google Scholar
• Lieberman L, Stuart M. Self-determined recreational and leisure choices of individuals with deaf-blindness. J Vis Impair Blind. 2002;96(10):724–735.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Simcock P, Manthorpe J. Deafblind and neglected or deafblindness neglected? Revisiting the case of Beverley Lewis. Br J Soc Work. 2014;44:2325–2341.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Reid C. Journey of a deaf-blind woman. J Media Cult. 2010;13:2–3.
   Google Scholar
• Watters C, Owen M, Munroe S. A study of deaf-blind demographics and services in Canada [Internet]. 2005. Available from: http://disabilitystudies.ca/wp-content/uploads/2010/08/deaf-blind-demographics-report-dec-2004.pdf
   Google Scholar
• Zannon De Andrade Figueiredo M, Chiari BM, Niegia B, et al. Communication in deafblind adults with Usher syndrome: retrospective observational study. CoDAS. 2013;25:319–324.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Hersh M. Deafblind people, stigma and the use of communication and mobility assistive devices. Technol Disabil. 2013;25:245–261.
   Google Scholar
• Helen G, Karen D, Wily P. First-person accounts. J Vis Impair Blind. 1995;89:197–210.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Soper J. Deafblind people’s experiences of cochlear implantation. Br J Vis Impair. 2006;24:19–29.
   Google Scholar
• Emerson J, Bishop J. Videophone technology and students with deaf-blindness: a method for increasing access and communication. J Vis Impair Blind. 2012;106:622–633.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Gallagher J. 2002. Information about deafblindness [Internet]. Available from: http://www.deafblind.com/info-db.html.
   Google Scholar
• Carnaby S. Reflections on social integration for people with intellectual disability: does interdependence have a role?. J Intellect Dev Disabil. 1998;23:219–228.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Grills NJ. Interdependence: a new model for the global approach to disability. CJGH. 2015;2:1.
   Google Scholar
• White GW, Lloyd Simpson J, Gonda C, et al. Moving from independence to interdependence: a conceptual model for better understanding community participation of centers for independent living consumers. J Disabil Policy Stud. 2010;20:233–240.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Coster W, Khetani MA. Measuring participation of children with disabilities: issues and challenges. Disabil Rehabil. 2008;30:639–648.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Simeonsson RJ, Björck-Åkessön E, Lollar DJ. Communication, disability, and the ICF-CY. Augment Altern Commun. 2012;28:3–10.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Threats TT, Worrall L. Classifying communication disability using the ICF. Adv Speech Lang Pathol. 2004;6:53–62.
   Google Scholar
• van Nes F, Abma T, Jonsson H, et al. Language differences in qualitative research: is meaning lost in translation?. Eur J Ageing. 2010;7:313–316.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar